CNR MHNS010044252020
CR. No. I­329/2020,
Satpur Police Station,
Nashik
registered
under sections 395,
394,435,279,337,338,
326,427,143,144,147,
148,149 of the Indian
Penal
Code
and
184/119/177 of the
Motor Vehicle Act.

Order below Exh.1 in Cri. Bail Application No.1608/2020.
{ Vishal Mukunda Bhutekar Vs. State }
The bail application is filed under section 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( for short ‘ the Cr.P.C.’) by the
applicant­accused Vishal Mukunda Bhutekar, arrested on 8.11.2020
in connection with C.R. No. I­329/2020, registered under sections
395,394,435, 279,337,338, 326,427, 143,144,147,148,149 of the Indian
Penal Code and 184/119/177 of the Motor Vehicle Act ( for short ‘the
IPC and MV Act’), filed with Satpur Police Station, Nashik. He is in
magisterial custody remand since 13.11.2020.
2.

The application has been preferred on the grounds that
the applicant­accused is falsely implicated in this crime. He is not a
habitual offender. He has no criminal antecedents. He is the only
earning member of his family. He is ready to abide with any
condition imposed by this Court. He was arrested on suspicion.
Nothing is recovered from him. He has not participated in crime. He
is unknown with other accused and witnesses. His family is
dependent on him. Hence, bail may be granted to them.
3.

The learned APP Mr. Kadave, has filed say at Exh.05.

He has opposed the bail application on the grounds that the offence
..2..

is serious. The applicant­accused has not given any relevant
information while in custody. Activa Motorcycle MH­15­DR 6040 is
yet to be recovered. Witnesses would be pressurized. He would
commit similar crimes. Hence, bail may not be granted to them.
4.

Heard both the sides. Learned APP Mr. Kadave and
learned Advocate Mr. Ugale have advanced their respective
arguments as per their contentions.
5.

Amidst the above rival contentions, it is to be decided as
to whether the applicant­accused has made out a genuine case for
his enlargement on bail.
6.

Briefly stated, as per FIR dated – 07.11.2020,
informant Sanket Kasar was proceeding towards Carban Naka. Near
Hotel Annapurna he was dashed by a Activa Motorcycle coming
from wrong side. He sustained muffle injuries. At that time 7 to 8
persons came there. They asked him to compensate for accident.
Informant Sanket refused as he was not at fault. On this count the
persons gathered over there gave beatings to him. The uncle of
informant Sanket, Bhagwan Kasar came at the spot in a TATA Sumo
Vehicle alongwith his two friends. They were also beaten by the
persons gathered over there. They damaged TATA Sumo Vehicle
and set on fire the motor­cycle of the informant. The mobile phone
of Shrikrushna Kothekar and gold ring of Santosh Nagare was
forcibly dispossessed. The informant heard the name of one Pankaj
during the incident who was told to fire the motor­cycle.
Accordingly, FIR was registered.

Cri. Bail Application No.1608/2020.
..3..

7.

On going through the FIR, the name of applicant­
accused is not mentioned in it. The FIR is against unknown persons.
No physical description of the persons is given in the FIR. The
recovery from the applicant­accused is pertaining to his cloths. The
dispossessed muddemal i.e. golden ring and mobile phone is not
recovered from him.
8.

The objection of prosecution is pertaining to recovery of
Activa motor­cycle. The number of Activa Motorcycle is mentioned
in the say of Investigating Officer. Its whereabouts can be traced
through RTO Office. The applicant­accused is in custody since
8.11.2020. He was in PCR from 8.11.2020 to 13.11.2020. Nothing is
revealed from him pertaining to the motor­cycle at his instance.
9.

The another objection of prosecution is regarding threat
to witnesses. However, no previous criminal record, crime numbers
or earlier convictions of the applicant­accused are placed on record.
Therefore, it cannot be ascertained and inferred that the applicant­
accused is a habitual offender. No criminal antecedents of the
applicant­accused are seen on record. There is nothing in the say of
Investigating Officer that the physical custody of the applicant­
accused would be helpful for further investigation.
10.

Thus,in the totality of the circumstances, there are no
exceptional grounds raised by the prosecution to deny and reject the
bail plea of the accused, when bail is the rule and jail is an
exception. There are no circumstances to infer that the applicant­
accused would flee from justice. The objections of the prosecution
can be taken care of by imposing certain conditions on the
..4..

applicants­accused. Resultantly, I proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
1
Application is hereby allowed.

2
Applicant/accused namely Vishal Mukunda Bhutekar, be
enlarged on bail, in Crime No.I­329/2020 registered with
Satpur Police Station, District : Nashik on furnishing
personal bond of Rs.25,000/­ with one or two sureties in
like amount.

3
He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of
the case so as dissuade them for disclosing such facts to the
Court or to any police officer.

4
He shall not commit similar or any other offence and misuse
the liberty granted by this court.

5
He shall attend the court dates scrupulously and co­operate
in progress of the trial.

6
He shall attend the concerned police station on every
Monday in between 10.00 am to 1.00 pm till competition of
the investigation.

7
He shall furnish their address proof, identity proof and
mobile number and place of abode and also furnish the
address and identity proof along with mobile number of
two nearest relatives, residing in District Nashik.

8
If the applicants­accused commit breach of any of the
conditions mentioned above, the bail would be cancelled at
the moment.

9
Bail before committal court if case is not committed.
(Dictated and Pronounced in open court.)
Samarendra
Prakashrao
Naik Nimbalkar
27.11.2020.

Digitally signed by
Samarendra Prakashrao
Naik Nimbalkar
Date: 2020.11.30
11:09:06 +0530
(S.P. Naik­Nimbalkar )
Additional Sessions Judge,
Nashik.